On Fri, Jul 8, 2022 at 1:22 PM Shuah Khan <skhan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On 7/7/22 10:48 PM, David Gow wrote: > > Make KUnit trigger the new TAINT_TEST taint when any KUnit test is run. > > Due to KUnit tests not being intended to run on production systems, and > > potentially causing problems (or security issues like leaking kernel > > addresses), the kernel's state should not be considered safe for > > production use after KUnit tests are run. > > > > This both marks KUnit modules as test modules using MODULE_INFO() and > > manually taints the kernel when tests are run (which catches builtin > > tests). > > > > Acked-by: Luis Chamberlain <mcgrof@xxxxxxxxxx> > > Tested-by: Daniel Latypov <dlatypov@xxxxxxxxxx> > > Reviewed-by: Brendan Higgins <brendanhiggins@xxxxxxxxxx> > > Signed-off-by: David Gow <davidgow@xxxxxxxxxx> > > --- > > > > No changes since v5: > > https://lore.kernel.org/linux-kselftest/20220702040959.3232874-3-davidgow@xxxxxxxxxx/ > > > > No changes since v4: > > https://lore.kernel.org/linux-kselftest/20220701084744.3002019-3-davidgow@xxxxxxxxxx/ > > > > David, Brendan, Andrew, > > Just confirming the status of these patches. I applied v4 1/3 and v4 3/4 > to linux-kselftest kunit for 5.20-rc1. > I am seeing v5 and v6 now. Andrew applied v5 looks like. Would you like > me to drop the two I applied? Do we have to refresh with v6? Just noting here that there'll be a merge conflict between this patch (3/4) and some other patches lined up to go through the kunit tree: https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/linux-kselftest/patch/20220625050838.1618469-2-davidgow@xxxxxxxxxx/ Not sure how we want to handle that. Daniel
